OECD Public Governance Reviews: Palestinian Authority

2. Review of the Strategic Framework for Public Administration Reform in the Palestinian Authority

Abstract

An overall vision and prioritised objectives, which guide and co-ordinate public administration reform implementation, are required in order to achieve results. It is therefore important to develop a coherent strategic framework for PAR. This section analyses the existing strategic framework for Public Administration Reform in the Palestinian Authority.

A fragmented strategic framework for PAR

The National Development Plan 2021-2023

The PA’s “National Policy Agenda (NPA) 2017-2022: Putting Citizens First” (Palestinian Authority, 2016[1]) outlines the main PAR objectives of the PA. This is further recalled in the “National Development Plan 2021-2023” (NDP)1 (Palestinian Authority, 2020[2]), which was created through consultations with civil society, the private sector, and the international community, and extends the NPA’s implementation period.

Overall, the NDP recognises governance reforms as a priority. It includes objectives pertaining to most of the substance areas for PAR as outlined in the OECD/SIGMA Principles of Public Administration (OECD, 2018[3]) and the OECD Framework for Sound Public Governance (OECD, 2020[4]), most notably regarding policy development and co-ordination, civil service and human resources management, integrity, anti-corruption, gender mainstreaming, organisation of public administration, transparency and accountability, the delivery of public services, and public financial management. The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) also made efforts to align the NPA and the different thematic and crosscutting strategies with the United Nation’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

In particular, the second pillar of the NDP titled “Excellent Public Service Provision” establishes PAR priorities along three overarching objectives (see Table 2.1):

• Improvement of the quality and accessibility of public services through the development and implementation of a government-wide service improvement strategy and an e-government strategy. Additionally, the partnership between the public, the private, and the non-governmental sector will be strengthened to better deliver services.

• Strengthening accountability and transparency through combatting corruption in all its forms, implementing the code of conduct for civil servants, strengthening transparency and access to information, strengthening the role of the financial and administrative audit institutions, strengthening results-based management and integrated planning and budgeting, promoting effective human resources management and development, and institutionalising gender mainstreaming in policymaking, planning and budgeting.

• Strengthening effectiveness and efficiency of public financial management through ensuring fiscal sustainability and improving public financial management, expanding the tax base, and enhancing tax collection, rationalising expenditures, reforming the public sector pension system, and rationalising the organisation of the Palestinian Authority’s public administration.

Table 2.1. PAR areas covered in the National Development Plan

Overarching goals for PAR in the National Development Plan: 1. Improvement of the quality and accessibility of public services 2. Strengthening accountability and transparency 3. Strengthening effectiveness and efficiency of public financial management

Coverage of PAR areas	PAR-related priority measures in the National Development Plan
Civil service	Implementing the code of conduct for civil servants Promoting effective human resources management and development
Organisation and functioning of public administration	Reform and restructure local government and administration Reform and restructure public institutions for more efficient service provision.
Anticorruption	Combating corruption in all its forms
Transparency and accountability	Reinforcement of the partnership between the public, the private, and the non-governmental sector to deliver services Strengthening transparency and access to information Strengthening the role of the financial and administrative audit institutions
Service delivery	Development and implementation of a government-wide service improvement strategy Development and implementation of a government-wide e-government strategy Promoting decentralisation in the provision of services at the local level. Launching the Government Excellence Programme. Launching and activating the e-government portal and providing basic services to citizens through it
Public financial management	Ensuring fiscal sustainability and improving public financial management Expanding the tax base and enhancing tax collection Rationalising expenditures, reforming the public sector pension system
Policy development and co-ordination	Strengthening results-based management and integrated planning and budgeting
Gender	Institutionalise gender mainstreaming in policymaking, planning, and budgeting

Source: (Palestinian Authority, 2020[2]).

During the 2019-2020 period, the PMO ran an assessment of the current strategic planning framework and found that the comprehensive nature of the NDP, which includes all the sectors without clearly prioritising a limited number of specific results, has not been effective in delivering tangible results compared to what was planned. Therefore, the new strategic planning approach that the PMO put forward in late 2022 proposes a shift from the NDP, which will be dismissed, towards a targeted Government Programme (GP), which will focus on a few main pillars, strategic priorities, and strategic projects. The extent to which the GP will incorporate prioritised PAR objectives remains to be seen.

The Government Reform Agenda (GRA)

In addition to the Palestinian Authority’s National Development Plan, the GRA which was prompted by the President of the PA and adopted by the Council of Ministers (CoM) in April 2022, is a second overarching strategic document outlining PAR objectives. The GRA aims to address priority issues that impede the implementation of strategic plans for national development. As such, it is meant to strengthen both governance and accountability in state institutions, and to improve the quality of services towards people. Line ministries are tasked to operationalise these priorities through executive plans. However, the operational planning process was deemed too recent to assess in this Review.

Building on the previous experiences and the main reform achievements made, the GRA identifies twenty reform priorities grouped into five clusters. Among those, the clusters “Administrative reform,” “Financial reform,” and in part the cluster on “Economic reform” include relevant priorities for PAR (see Table 2.2):

The cluster on Administrative Reform identifies:

• Correcting the public administration and civil service system and handling the employee’s salary bill through a) restructuring government institutions and reconsidering their role and the role of employees in the digital economy, b) adopting and applying of proven global models of reform, excellence, and competitive institutional performance in all government institutions, c) reconsidering the Civil Service Law and its amendments, and d) rationalising government posts and developing an early retirement system for military and civilian personnel.

• Combating negative impressions about societal issues, including corruption through a) review and implement the access to information policy, b) developing the relationship with civil society, c) raising awareness and information about the government's efforts in implementing laws and fighting corruption, d) strengthening the principle of accountability and dealing with people’s concerns effectively, and e) prosecuting those involved in corruption cases and publishing the results by the law.

• Restructuring government functions and completing the e-government services system through a) building and implementing process models in government institutions, b) implementing excellence systems, international standards, and excellence programmes, c) harmonising joint operations and projects among government institutions, d) completing the project of converting services to electronic and smart methods, and e) building professional service centres for services that are only provided in service centres.

The cluster on Financial Reform identifies:

• Reforming the government revenue system and the rationalisation of expenditures through a) reforming the tax system, including laws, policies, and procedures, and utilising technology for this purpose, b) carrying out a study and restructuring of service fees, and c) rectifying the general budget control system, managing development projects, and cash flows, and setting clear disbursement mechanisms.

The cluster on Economic Reform identifies:

• Providing a stronger partnership with civil society institutions and enhancement of their role in comprehensive development through a) harmonising and integrating non-governmental and community-based organisations' programmes with the government action plans, b) establishing a sustainable dialogue framework with civil society institutions that allows updating the laws related to their work, and c) ensuring that each government department continues to dialogue with representatives of the sector it represents.

For each reform measure, the GRA presents the fundamental issues to be addressed, the main reform initiatives and the expected results, although the formulation of the latter is not always clear. The strategy also identifies the main responsible institutions and, in several cases, the main partner institutions.

Interviewees during the OECD’s fact-finding missions identified several areas for further improvement. The first one being the lack of a clear and concrete implementation timeframe as stakeholders appeared to have different understandings of its actual duration. Furthermore, like the National Development Agenda, the GRA does not provide dedicated performance indicators and overall cost estimates. While a co-ordination mechanism is identified, it is only described in general terms.

Finally, interlocutors mentioned that while the National Development Plan was created in consultation with the civil society, the private sector, and the international community, the GRA is an internal Cabinet document prepared without broad internal and external consultations. To strengthen stakeholder involvement, accountability, and transparency a donor report on the reform agenda is to be distributed and will form the topic of dedicated workshops in 2023 with the private sector, CSOs, and internal stakeholders.

Table 2.2. PAR areas covered in the Government Reform Agenda

Overarching goals for PAR in the Administrative Reform cluster
1. Correcting the public administration and civil service system and handling the employee’s salary 2. Combating negative impressions about societal issues, including corruption 3. Restructuring government functions and completing the e-government services system
Relevant PAR area	Specific objectives
Civil Service area	Rationalising government posts
Organisation and functions of public administration	Restructuring government institutions and reconsidering their role and the role of employees in the digital economy Adopting and applying of proven global models of reform, excellence, and competitive institutional performance in all government institutions Building and implementing process models in government institutions Harmonising joint operations and projects among government institutions
Integrity	Raising awareness and information about the government's efforts in implementing laws and fighting corruption Prosecuting those involved in corruption cases and publishing the results by the law
Transparency and accountability	Review and implement the access to information policy Developing the relationship with civil society Strengthening the principle of accountability and dealing with people’s concerns effectively
Service delivery	Completing the project of converting services to electronic and smart methods, Building professional service centres for services that are only provided in service centres.
Overarching goals for PAR in the Financial Reform cluster
1. Reform of the government revenue system and rationalisation of expenditures
Relevant PAR area	Specific objectives
Public Financial Management	Reforming the tax system, including laws, policies, and procedures, and utilising technology for this purpose Carrying out a study and restructuring of service fees, Rectifying the general budget control system, managing development projects, and cash flows, and setting clear disbursement mechanisms.
Overarching goals for PAR in the Economic Reform cluster
1. Stronger partnership with civil society institutions and enhancement of their role in comprehensive development
Relevant PAR area	Specific objectives
Transparency and accountability	Harmonising and integrating non-governmental and community-based organisations' programmes with the government action plans Establishing a sustainable dialogue framework with civil society institutions that allows updating the laws related to their work, Ensuring that each government department continues to dialogue with representatives of the sector it represents.

Source: (Palestinian Authority, 2022[5]).

The new strategic planning approach for 2024-2029 does not mention the GRA. Therefore, whether the GRA will be confirmed as an overarching strategic document or adapted to the new approach remains to be confirmed.

Alignment between the National Development Plan and the Government Reform Agenda

The NDP and the GRA present a certain level of alignment of PAR objectives (see Table 2.3). The highest level of alignment relates to the areas “organisation and functions of public administration,” “integrity,” “service delivery,” and “public financial management.” Regarding “policy development and co-ordination” and “gender,” the GRA does not include these thematic areas.

Overall, the GRA further specifies the general objectives proposed by the NDP. In some cases, the GRA goes beyond the NDP’s priorities while sometimes it does not reflect these at all. However, none of the two strategic documents clarify the hierarchy between themselves. Interlocutors reported in the questionnaires and during the fact-finding missions that they consider the GRA as their main guiding strategic document.

During the OECD’s fact-finding missions, various institutional interlocutors recognised that the PA’s strategic plans are often overly ambitious and not consistent with the reality of both the limited financial resources and the administrative capacities that are necessary to deal with numerous reform areas simultaneously. In fact, during the fact-finding missions and the capacity building activities, it was estimated that at least half of the stated objectives in previous strategies were not being effectively implemented due to overambitious and unrealistic planning. The following table analyses the level of alignment between the NDP and the GRA with recommendations to improve in Chapter 5.

Table 2.3. Alignment between the National Development Plan and the Government Reform Agenda

Level of alignment between the National Development Plan and the Government Reform Agenda per PAR area

Level of alignment per PAR area	NDP	GRA	Assessment
Civil service area	Implementing the code of conduct for civil servants Promoting effective human resources management and development	Reconsidering the Civil Service Law and its amendments Rationalising government posts Developing an early retirement system for military and civilian personnel	The level of alignment of the civil service area can be improved as the objectives are not consistent among the two strategic documents.
Organisation and functions of public administration	Reform and restructure local government and administration Reform and restructure public institutions for more efficient service provision.	Restructuring government institutions and reconsidering their role and the role of employees in the digital economy, Adopting and applying of proven global models of reform, excellence, and competitive institutional performance in all government institutions Building and implementing process models in government institutions, Implementing excellence systems, international standards, and excellence programmes Harmonising joint operations and projects among government institutions	The level of alignment of the organisation and functions of the public administration area is assessed as high. The GRA recalls and further specifies the objective of the NDP in more detail.
Integrity	Combatting corruption in all its forms	Raising awareness and information about the government's efforts in implementing laws and fighting corruption Prosecuting those involved in corruption cases and publishing the results by the law	The level of alignment of the integrity area is assessed as high. The objectives of the GRA can be considered as a specification of the way the PA intends to combat corruption.
Transparency and accountability	Reinforcement of the partnership between the public, the private, and the non-governmental sector to deliver services Strengthening transparency and access to information Strengthening the role of the financial and administrative audit institutions	Review and implement the access to information policy Developing the relationship with civil society Strengthening the principle of accountability and dealing with people’s concerns effectively Harmonising and integrating non-governmental and community-based organisations' programmes with the government action plans Establishing a sustainable dialogue framework with civil society institutions that allows updating the laws related to their work, Ensuring that each government department continues to dialogue with representatives of the sector it represents.	A certain level of alignment is noted regarding the transparency and accountability area. Both the NDP and the GRA include objectives related to access of information and enhancement of relations with the civil society. The GRA however, does not include the objective related to a stronger financial and administrative oversight.
Service delivery	Development and implementation of a government-wide service improvement strategy Development and implementation of a government-wide e-government strategy Promoting decentralisation in the provision of services at the local level. Launching the Government Excellence Programme. Launching and activating the e-government portal and providing basic services to citizens through it.	Building professional service centers for services that are only provided in service centers Completing the project of converting services to electronic and smart methods.	The level of alignment of the service delivery area is assessed as high. Both the NDP and the GRA aim to digitalise the public administration and service delivery and mention the need to improve the quality of public services.
Public financial management	Ensuring fiscal sustainability and improving public financial management Expanding the tax base and enhancing tax collection Rationalising expenditures, reforming the public sector pension system	Reforming the tax system, including laws, policies, and procedures, and utilising technology for this purpose Carrying out a study and restructuring of service fees Rectifying the general budget control system, managing development projects, and cash flows, and setting clear disbursement mechanisms.	The level of alignment of the public financial management area is assessed as high. Both the NDP and the GRA envisage measures to increase revenues and increase effectiveness of expenditures.
Policy development and co-ordination	Strengthening results-based management and integrated planning and budgeting		The policy development and co-ordination area can only be identified in the NDP with the GRA not addressing the NDP’s objective.
Gender	Institutionalise gender mainstreaming in policymaking, planning, and budgeting		No alignment between both documents can be found regarding the gender area, as only the NDP includes gender mainstreaming among its objectives.

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

PAR areas covered by dedicated strategic and planning documents

While the NDP and the GRA include most of the areas for public administration reform outlined by the OECD/SIGMA Principles of Public Administration and the OECD Framework for Sound Public Governance, several PAR areas get further attention in dedicated strategic and operational plans (see Table 2.4 and Table 2.5.

The Civil Service National Strategic Plan, the National Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption 2020-2022, and the Cross-Sectoral Gender Strategy 2021-2023 cover the areas of ‘civil service and human resources management’, ‘integrity’, and ‘gender mainstreaming’. Through its focus on e-services and e-government, the Sectoral Strategy for Technology and Public Administration 2021-2023 partly covers the service delivery area. The Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption 2020-2022 also partly covers the areas of transparency and accountability and civil society engagement. The Sectoral Strategy for Public Finance Management 2021 – 2023 includes reforms to increase effectiveness of expenditures, to improve the revenue system, budgetary and expenditure transparency, internal and external control, financial audit and gender-responsive budgeting. The PAR areas on organisation and functions of public administration, and policy development, co-ordination, and monitoring are not covered by dedicated strategic and planning documents.

Table 2.4. PAR areas covered by dedicated strategic and planning documents

Level of coverage of PAR area	Sector/cross-sector strategy	Comments
Civil Service and Human Resources Management	Sectoral Strategy of the Civil Service 2021-2023	Good coverage
Service delivery	Sectoral Strategy for Technology and Public Administration 2021-2023	Partial coverage - Only e-services are covered
Integrity	Cross-sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption 2020-2022	Good integrity coverage. Transparency, accountability, and engagement with the civil society are covered to a limited extent.
Transparency and accountability
Engagement with the civil society
Gender mainstreaming	Cross-sectoral Gender Strategy 2021-2023	Good coverage
Organisation and functions of public administration	N/A	Not covered
Policy development, co-ordination, and monitoring	N/A	Not covered
Public Finance Management	Sectoral Strategy for Public Finance Management 2021 - 2023	Good coverage

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

The Civil Service National Strategic Plan

In 2021, the CoM adopted the Sectoral Strategy of the Civil Service 2021-2023 (SSCS). This is a reform-oriented strategic document which outlines several concrete initiatives aimed at improving the PA’s civil service system. The strategy is based on the mid-term review of the Civil Service Strategy 2018-2022 and was elaborated by the General Personnel Council (GPC) through consultations with the HR units of the different institutions: about 80 HR departments both from ministries and non-ministerial institutions were consulted through workshops and bilateral meetings. There are no records of dedicated consultations with civil society.

Making effective use of PESTLE and SWOT models, the document provides a strong analysis of the context by identifying existing political, institutional, legal, and economic problems, supported by relevant statistics. The SSCS outlines the strategic and operational objectives, which are clearly aligned with both the objectives of the National Development Plan and SDG 16 on Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions. However, the four strategic objectives and related sub-objectives are formulated as means or actions rather than suited improvements2. At this stage, the planned objectives fall short in describing the expected changes in the different civil service and human resources areas (e.g., “professionalisation of civil servants,” “more effective human resource management practices across the public service,” “and ensuring merit-based principles in all aspects of the civil service career”).

The strategy also provides for the elaboration of 16 bylaws to implement the revised Civil Service Law, which is still pending adoption. The document does not clarify what specific aspects of the civil service and human resources management system the bylaws will address. However, interviewees during the OECD’s fact-finding missions clarified that the strategy aims to address an entire range of areas such as recruitment, job classification, competence framework, implementation of the code of conduct, job descriptions, reorganisation of HR units, digitalisation of HR management and job announcements, development of training plans, and development of civil servants’ capacities.

While thought has been given towards the financial aspects with the inclusion of budget tables, these are mostly limited towards the identification of available government resources without differentiating the types of costs. Financial gaps, which could be used for policy dialogues with external donors are not clarified. Concrete cost estimates of individual reform measures are not provided.

The SSCS comes with a dedicated monitoring framework outlining indicators that include baselines, intermediate and final targets. However, chosen indicators only allow for measuring the outputs of the planned measures rather than the improvements they are meant to produce. To address this shortcoming, the GPC has started an initiative to develop a digital planning and monitoring system within the GPC itself. In the future, this will be further connected with the HR departments of the public institutions that fall under the scope of the civil service legislation. This tool would also contribute towards clarifying the responsibilities for implementation and monitoring at the organisational and individual level. In this assessment it was not possible to verify the alignment between the SSCS’ monitoring framework and the NDP’s Strategic Results Framework.

At this stage, the document would benefit from further clarification regarding the co-ordination and implementation arrangements with other institutions, e.g., co-operation with the Anticorruption Commission in its relation to integrity of the civil service, or co-operation with the Ministry of Finance (MoF) on the development of the payroll system.

The Technology and Public Administration Strategy

The Ministry of Telecommunication and Information Technology (MTIT) in collaboration with the GS released the "Technology and Public Administration Strategy 2021-2023" in 2021. This reform-oriented strategic document offers a framework and a road map for advancing the PA's technological infrastructure, enabling the best possible use of information and communications technology, creating a knowledge-based digital economy, enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of public administration, improving the quality and accessibility of public services through digitalisation, and encouraging a knowledge-based workforce. At this stage, the approach does not include a clear prioritisation of the services to be digitalised and lacks attention towards administrative simplification, a key requirement for successful service digitalisation. The GS, which has a general mandate on service delivery, may have dedicated plans in this regard, though this could not be verified in this Review.

The strategy provides a good context analysis, including the identification of strengths and weaknesses. Among the 5 strategic objectives it puts forward, the first and the second ones are particularly relevant for PAR. The first strategic goal, "Strengthening the ICT infrastructure", calls for building a sufficient and secure fibre-optic network connected to the governmental institutions. The second one, “Raising the level of efficiency, effectiveness, transparency, and equity in government operations and services through governance and automation of government services” focuses on the delivery of public services through digital channels.

The strategy clarifies the main institutional responsibilities, identifying the main steering and co-ordination institutions and bodies. In line with the OECD Recommendation for Digital Government Strategies (OECD, 2014[6]) and building further on the first digital government strategy supported by the OECD in 2013. It includes the participation of the private sector; however, it does not mention the specific involvement of civil society. While it indicates general cost estimates for most of the planned interventions and strategic objectives, it does not identify financial sources and financial gaps that could be used in the policy dialogue with external donors.

A dedicated monitoring framework with outcome-level indicators, including intermediate and final targets, and timeframes for achieving them is included and briefly described as well. This will be supported with a dedicated IT system, yet to be developed, to be used by all involved institutions. It was not possible to verify the alignment of this monitoring framework with the NDP’s Strategic Results Framework.

The National Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption

In 2020 the Palestinian Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) issued the “National Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption (NCSSIA) 2020-2022 (Citizenship - Empowerment - Reform)”. It is a reform-oriented strategic document that provides a framework and roadmap promoting an integrity-based and corruption-free society. It is structured around four main pillars differentiating between prevention measures, social participation, law enforcement, and international co-operation.

The strategy proposes 13 specific programmes supporting integrity in the public and private sectors, including countermeasures against corruption, educating the public about the negative effects of corruption, and building institutional capacity for law enforcement. It also encompasses specific measures to increase civil society engagement, openness, and access to information. The linkages with the pillars of the National Policy Agenda and several SDGs are clearly clarified.

The NCCSSIA was developed through consultations with relevant institutions and some civil society organisations since the problem identification phase though it could have also included more actors specialised on governance and anti-corruption issues. The document provides a good situational analysis, including through the identification of strengths and weaknesses and builds on the latest accomplishments in enhancing the integrity and anti-corruption system. Each strategic objective is also coupled with clearly formulated expected results and coherent reform measures.

The PACC is clearly identified as the lead institution, furthermore the strategy identifies the institutions – in some cases from civil society - that are in charge and that must contribute for each of the 13 results and associated interventions. In several cases, the implementation period could be more clearly specified. The PACC has also signed specific agreements with both the civil society and the relevant public institutions to support effective implementation.

The strategy provides a monitoring framework to follow up on the implementation of planned measures. However, there are not performance outcome-level indicators associated to the four strategic objectives. This fact hinders the possibility of measuring progress against expected improvements. The framework includes only output-based indicators, thus only allowing for monitoring of the implementation of activities.

The monitoring system envisages that implementation parties send short monthly progress reports on the implementation of the measures and activities under their responsibility through a digital portal. The PACC then consolidates the various contributions received.

While the document does not provide for formal cost estimates, interviewees during OECD’s fact-finding missions mentioned that a separate document with concrete costs estimates is sent to the MoF. The reliability and the gap between necessary and available resources could not be verified in this assessment.

The “National Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption 2020-2022” also outlines PA’s reform measures aimed at promoting transparency and access to information. It is worth noting that three out of the 13 programmes of the strategy address transparency and accountability issues. Through its first pillar, the strategy aims to establish a dedicated legal framework and further institutional arrangements to foster access of information on the overall performance of the institutions. to this aim, it promotes the approval of the Law on Right to Access Information by engaging with the civil society. Furthermore, through its second pillar it wants to enhance the oversight role of the civil society and the media and to establish independent, external, internal, and effective oversight arrangements over all public institutions.

While these objectives are truly relevant, the strategy seems to be lacking a mid-term approach towards institutionalisation of public consultations and an enhanced engagement with the civil society at large in the policy cycle as also identified in the OECD Review Rule of Law and Governance in the Palestinian Authority: Delivering Better Policies and Legislation for People (OECD, 2022[7]).

The Cross-sectoral Gender Strategy

The "Cross-sectoral Gender Strategy 2021-2023" was published in 2021 by the Ministry of Women Affairs. It is a reform-oriented strategic document which strives to address the vulnerabilities of women in the PA and give them the tools they need to effectively participate in political and socioeconomic growth. The strategic plan includes institutionalising gender equality and justice issues in public institutions as one of its five strategic goals, along with increasing women's participation in decision-making in governmental and non-governmental institutions. The strategy makes a clear connection between the SDGs, the NPA, and the NDP.

For each strategic objective, the document identifies a set of reform measures, which are clearly linked to the main problems identified in the extensive situation analysis. Implementation responsibilities are roughly identified, though they could be made clearer.

The strategy also provides for a monitoring framework which includes outcome-level indicators complemented with targets. However, it misses to set baselines and the way the identified indicator will be measured is not described. Output-level indicators are provided for all measures, and these include baselines, intermediate, and final targets.

Finally, the strategy includes budget tables. While the tables could more clearly link resources to individual objectives, some of them connect performance indicators with budget lines. Another table identifies the overall volume of governmental resources needed to implement the strategy along with external funds and financial gaps. In the budget table, the document also identifies the main implementing bodies leading and contributing to implementation of the different programmes. For each strategic objective, the table lists related programmes, and for each programme it presents objectives, general qualitative targets, and the responsible institutions (i.e., Ministry of Women Affairs, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Agriculture, and Ministry of Employment). It falls short in presenting the steering, co-ordination, and monitoring arrangements.

Sectoral Strategy for Public Finance Management 2021 – 2023

The “Sectoral Strategy for Public Finance Management 2021 – 2023" was issued in August 2020 by the MoF. Overall, the strategy aims to develop an “integrated system for managing public funds that is legally and regulatory harmonious, based on the efficient and fair collection of public resources. Through the preparation and implementation of a realistic general budget based on medium-term programmes in line with the national policy agenda and sectoral strategies, the new system is meant to finance public services in line people’s aspirations”. The strategy sets three very pertinent strategic objectives which, together, encompass revenue collection, expenditures effectiveness, budgetary and expenditure transparency, financial audit, internal and external control, and gender-responsive budgeting. However, the formulation of the first two objectives could be improved to better describe the expected improvements3. The strategy makes a clear connection between the SDGs, and the NDP, and is largely consistent with them.

The situation analysis is based on the 2018 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) assessment. The World Bank issued the final report in June 20194, which provided a diagnostic analysis that the PA used to inform the design of the new Public Finance Reform (PFM) reform strategy. Based on this solid analytical basis, the MoF, in partnership with several institutions, performed its own situation analysis. The strategic document provides for substantial evidence to support analytical findings.

For each of the three strategic objectives mentioned above, the strategy sets clear and relevant specific objectives, as well as expected results, complemented by a mixture of output-level and outcome-level indicators, with baselines and annual targets. Moreover, for each strategic objective, the document also identifies a set of reform measures.

The main weaknesses relate to the following:

• The strategy does not provide any information regarding the way it will be co-ordinated and monitored. Indicators, completed with baselines and targets are presented but there is no information about which institution is responsible, and how they will be measured. Moreover, no co-ordination bodies are mentioned except for the Office of the Undersecretary which is described as having a role in managing the implementation of the strategy. However, no information is provided about its specific responsibilities, tasks, interactions with the MoF or other institutions.

• The very limited financial information included in the budget tables does not allow for putting resources, objectives, and reform measures in relation with each other.

• Implementation responsibilities are not clearly identified. If the MoF is identified as the lead institution and the budget table allocate resources to the State Audit Administrative Control Bureau, the High Council for public procurement policies, and the Anti-Corruption Commission, their role cannot be linked to any of the planned reform measures.

• The document does not mention any contribution from civil society or other ministerial and non-ministerial institutions in the identification and planning of public finance management reforms.

Table 2.5. Summary of the quality assessment of existing thematic PAR strategies

Description of quality requirements	Sectoral Strategy of the Civil Service 2021-2023	Technology and Public Administration Strategy 2021-2023	National Cross-Sectoral Strategy for Integrity and Anti-Corruption 2020-2022	Cross-sectoral Gender Strategy 2021-2023	Sectoral Strategy for Public Finance Management 2021 – 2023
Problem analysis
Strategic and operational objectives
Reform measures
Implementation deadlines
Output indicators
Outcome indicators
Lead institution
Contributing institutions
Financial information
Co-ordination and monitoring arrangements
Link with NPA/NDP
Link with SDGs
Colour code:	sufficient	To improve	Not available

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

Frameworks for policy development and regulatory governance

As highlighted in the OECD Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance (OECD, 2020[4]), effective policy development is critical to ensuring that governments are able to translate long, medium, and short-term policy goals into concrete courses of action. It also provides an opportunity for governments to collaborate with a wide range of stakeholders and as such is core to the democratic process. It ensures the public governance values - for instance of integrity, openness and transparency, inclusiveness, and accountability - are adopted widely across government, mainstreamed, and integrated not only in the design, but also in the policy implementation process. Translating high-level priorities and the government vision into achievable policies constitutes one of the greatest challenges in policymaking.

The Palestinian Authority’s institutional framework and mechanisms are enshrined in the Basic Law of 2003. As identified in the OECD Review Rule of Law and Governance in the Palestinian Authority: Delivering Better Policies and Legislation for People (OECD, 2022[7]), this Basic Law only contains limited provisions about the policy development process. Interlocutors during the OECD’s fact-finding mission identified that the lack of a coherent and comprehensive legal framework for policymaking or clearer guidelines leads to a lack of clarity of the overall process and to overlaps between functions, which have led to misunderstandings and tensions in the past. Furthermore, the PA also faces issues relating to overlapping mandates for regulatory policy, the administration of ex ante regulatory impact assessments and legislative drafting standards. Regulatory oversight functions are shared by several institutions leading to insufficient quality control of regulatory management tools. Regulatory impact assessments are yet to be carried out in practice, despite an existing formal requirement. However, the OECD’s interviews during the fact-finding missions showed that two intricately linked guidance documents issued in 2016 by the PMO and the Ministry of Finance and Planning (General Budget Directorate) are available and still in use, namely the Handbook 2017-2022 and the MTBPM respectively.

Handbook on the Elaboration of Sectoral and Cross-Cutting Strategies for the period 2017-2022

While these guidelines were being reviewed during the creation of this report, making it unable to assess the latest drafts, consulted institutions did not identify significant changes. The main objective of the Handbook 2017-2022 is to ensure consistency between the NPA and the different thematic and cross-cutting strategies and to ensure alignment between strategic mid-term and budget planning. The Handbook 2017-2022 includes principal elements which are necessary to guide the policymaking process and provide for some quality requirements related to policy outputs:

• Linking sectoral and cross-cutting strategies to the objectives of the NPA, as well as the inter-sectoral nature of most public policies and the need to cooperate with other institutions, the civil society, and the private sector.

• Linking the identified strategic objectives and concrete measures and outputs.

• Performing an assessment of the internal and external stakeholders (public institutions, the civil society, and the private sector).

• Clearly identifying co-ordination and implementation responsibilities at the organisational and individual level, most notably through a lead institution for each strategy, and by also clearly identifying contributing public institutions, civil society organisations, the private sector.

• Conducting consultations to discuss reciprocal implementation roles with public institutions, the civil society, and the private sector to identify - and review, where necessary - the overall and strategic objectives and related measures.

• Establishing co-ordination mechanisms among all the relevant programmes and between project managers.

• Considering the existing financial circumstances when identifying public policies and programmesprogramme. This requires each involved institution to estimate the costs of the strategy, programmesprogramme, and the main outputs over a 6-year period and for the upcoming year. This also requires involved institutions to estimate the resources needed for every year, distinguishing between recurrent, running, and one-off costs. They should also specify whether resources are expected to come from the Treasury or from development partners, civil society organisations or the private sector.

• Reviewing the strategic objectives, measures, and ambitions in case available resources are insufficient to achieve the quality of required outputs within the given timeframe.

• Clarifying the financial gaps and linking them to specific programmes programmeand outputs to feed discussions with the development partners.

The Handbook 2017-2022 also briefly describes standard institutional arrangements for planning and budgeting. It provides three alternative arrangements.

When a policy area and related policy objectives are to be achieved by one single public institution without the contribution of other institutions or the civil society or the private sector, the Handbook 2017-2022 provides for each lead institution to establish a Planning and Budget Management Group (PBMG). This group has decision-making responsibility over the identification of overall objectives, strategic objectives, measures, outputs, and the repartition of financial allocations among the programmes programmeand outputs. The PBMG should include:

• The minister or the head of the non-ministerial institution who forms the ultimate decision-maker with the PBMG.

• The deputy-minister or the deputy head of the non-ministerial institution who is responsible for organising and co-ordinating the workings of the PBMG.

• All programme managers, the senior planning officer, and the senior financial officer within the ministry or the non-ministerial institution. The programme managers are responsible for proposing policy options, including outputs and cost estimates. The senior planning officer and senior financial officer provide advice to the programme managers and to the head and deputy head of PBMG.

When the achievement of the envisaged policy objectives requires the intervention of civil society, the Handbook 2017-2022 provides for a wider membership of the PBMG to include major non-governmental organisations. In this case the PBMG is called Strategy, Planning and Budget administration Group (SPBAG).

When the achievement of policy objectives requires the contribution of different ministries or non-ministerial institutions, the lead institution establishes a Sector Strategy Group (SSG), whose composition includes:

• The PBMG of the lead institution.

• The deputy heads of the PBMG from other concerned ministries or non-ministerial institutions.

• A select number of programme managers, planning and finance officers in senior positions from the PBMGs of the relevant institutions.

• The main civil society organisations.

In practice, not all the quality requirements are consistently applied as there is no rigorous quality control mechanism in place to check compliance. This is especially the case regarding the quality of internal and public consultations, the establishment of co-ordination mechanisms gathering all the relevant parties, the reliability of cost estimates, the identification of financial sources and financial gaps, and the review of strategic and operational objectives in line with financial circumstances. Moreover, as reported by interviewed stakeholders during the fact-finding missions, quality requirements for each policy development phase (i.e., problem analysis, prioritisation, objectives setting and formulation, costing, etc.) are not sufficiently clarified and there are no standard tools to support public institutions.

The Handbook 2017-2022 neither provides for description of the overall policy cycle nor for a calendar, the only date provided being the end of June to deliver the first draft of policy proposals. The Handbook 2017-2022 only covers the policy identification and formulation phases; other key stages such as co-ordination, monitoring, reporting, and evaluation are not addressed. Stakeholders confirmed that that they do not have a clear understanding of the overall policy cycle. There are no clear steps identified for delivering policy inputs, for internal and external consultations, or for review of policy documents, until the adoption of policy documents by the CoM, especially as the institutions at the centre of government (CoG) are also not recognised in the Handbook 2017-2022 even though they have a strong role in steering and co-ordinating the policy development cycle. They do not participate in policy discussions within the planning and budgeting groups and their roles and their interactions with the different lead institutions at both the technical and political level are not identified. While verifying the alignment between the line ministries proposals and the government’s strategic priorities is the main aspect the CoG, stakeholders reported misalignment between thematic and whole-of-government priorities a recurrent issue.

Finally, while the Handbook 2017-2022 establishes a foundation for personal accountability by giving a mandate to programme managers to ensure the achievement of results and to negotiate with external donors, there are no institutional arrangements to ensure it. During the OECD’s fact-finding mission, institutional stakeholder also reported that there are no consequences envisaged for poor performance.

The new “Strategic planning approach” and the new “Strategic planning guidelines” for the planning cycle 2024-2029

The new approach and the new Guidelines 2024-2029 were introduced after this assessment was concluded. However, given that they introduce important innovations and improvements in the process, this Review provides here an overview of both documents.

The new “Strategic planning approach for 2024-2029”

At the time of writing, the current planning cycle is expected to end in December 2023. In 2022, the PMO ran a thorough review of the current strategic planning approach. This assessment process led to the identification of structural issues which are mostly in line with the present Review, namely:

• Insufficient prioritisation of policy objectives which hinders the capacity of government to concentrate its scarce resources on delivering tangible results for the citizens.

• Weak problem analysis and analytical approach to make choices and take decisions regarding the best way to achieve planned objectives.

• Weak linkage between planning and budgeting processes, due to the fact that strategic choices are often made without estimating implementation costs and without considering financial constraints.

• Poor data availability which affects the capacity to analyse the state of play, to set realistic targets, and to monitor progress.

This assessment led to the development of the new Strategic planning approach for 2024-2029 which introduced important innovations, notably:

• A move from a too comprehensive NDP to a narrower government programme (GP), focusing on a limited number of pillars, strategic priorities, and strategic projects and which allows for the concentration of resources. Performance indicators and targets are also expected to be identified and the Strategic Result Framework (SRF) to be narrowed down to focus on GP’s strategic priorities and strategic projects.

• The indicative timeline of the overall strategic planning cycle 2024-2029.

• More attention to the problem analysis and the introduction of elements of evidence-based policymaking.

• More meaningful mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues, which is also supported by dedicated instructions to the intention of both ministries and non-ministerial institutions.

• A stronger quality control function of the PMO, which is meant to improve the quality of strategic planning documents, and more regular information to the CoM concerning progress towards the achievement of the GP’s priorities.

• Stronger synergy between the planning, budgeting, and with aid management processes through more thorough information about key outputs, key activities and, where possible, estimation of implementation costs.

• A renewed effort to identify implementation responsibilities more clearly in order to enhance accountability for results, and to establish stronger interinstitutional co-operation through setting an inter-ministerial co-ordination group for each main pillar of the GP.

• A renewed SRF focusing on the GP’s key priorities, the identification of targets for each of GP’s strategic priorities and projects, as well as the identification of responsible institutions for each strategic project.

• The introduction of periodic reporting to the CoM on the implementation of GP’s priorities.

• A mid-term review of strategies, including objectives, actions, and targets after 3 years.

The new “Strategic planning guidelines for the strategic planning cycle 2024-2029”

To support line ministries and agencies (LMA) in applying the new approach to the preparation of their strategic documents, the PMO developed the new strategic planning guidelines which also introduce important, positive changes. The guidelines notably:

• Outline the main phases of the strategic planning cycle, which is considered a participatory process, and provides LMA with instructions. Some quality requirements are introduced.

• Put more emphasis on the quality of an evidence-based situation analysis and, consistently with the Mid-Term Budgeting Procedures Manual (MTBPM), on the need to clearly prioritise policy objective taking into consideration both the existing administrative capacities and financial circumstances. prioritisation and target setting become inter-institutional processes which take place in the Planning and Budget Management Group, with the participation of the financial units within the LMA and the MoF.

• Introduce the need to estimate implementation costs over the first three years, consistently with the above point. A new budget table promotes stronger result-oriented budgeting. Both operational and development costs are to be indicated for each result.

• Provide instructions for setting strategic objectives, results, and actions, and the related template, which require LMA to link with GP’s priorities and with SDGs. For each objective, LMA are requested to outline the expected results and, for each of them, to identify performance indicators and related baselines and interim and final targets. Each indicator is to be clearly linked with GP’s and SDGs’ indicators.

• Provide instructions for the design of policy interventions and projects, which put more emphasis on internal accountability and require more clarity in the distribution of implementation responsibilities between lead and contributing institutions. For each objective, result, planned intervention, and key output, the template provided by the PMO requires LMA to identify institutional responsibilities and outline the key projects.

• Require LMA to establish co-ordination mechanisms and describe them in the strategic document, along with the description of the mandate, role, and responsibilities of each stakeholder.

• Require LMA to describe how policy interventions and projects will be monitored and evaluated.

• Strengthen the PMO’s quality control function whose recommendations to LMA are to be considered as mandatory. Political discussions in the CoM are also introduced for approval of strategic documents.

Given that the new Guidelines 2024-2029 have been introduced very recently, it is too early to assess whether they will concretely improve the strategic planning system, and outputs.

Moreover, methodological instructions remain limited and LMA could benefit from more detailed guidance, tools, and assistance to apply the guidelines’ provisions.

Mid-Term Budgeting Procedures Manual

The “Mid-Term Budgeting Procedures Manual” (MTBPM) was elaborated to guide both the mid-term and annual budget preparations process for programmes and reforms implemented by individual ministries and public institutions. It presents the overall mid-term budget preparation cycle and provides more detailed guidance. However, during the fact-finding mission interlocutors clarified that in practice the government prepares and adopts only annual budgets. This is mainly due to uncertainty of financial circumstances. As the Handbook 2017-2022 provides information on the link between planning and budgeting, the MTBPM also extensively addresses the planning aspects, and the new Guidelines 2024-2029 further emphasise this link. The MTBPM does not provide a uniform calendar but envisages that the deputy head of the PBMG within each ministry sets the planning and budgeting calendar and deadlines. Interviewed interlocutors clarified that the annual budget, and related action plans are to be adopted by the end of the year and no later than March of the following year. However, this is not mentioned in the MTBPM and during this review it was not possible to assess internal guidance issued by individual ministries.

The MTBPM also introduces the Programme Management Team (PMT), which is to be established for each programme of a strategy to carry out the substance work related to planning and budgeting. The PMT represents an important forum to discuss plans and costs of activities at the technical level and prepares the decisions of the Planning and Budget Management Group, which is introduced by the Handbook 2017-2022, and confirmed by the new Guidelines 2024-2029. Neither the MTBPM nor the new Guidelines 2024-2029 mention the Strategy, Planning and Budget administration Group (SPBAG) or the Sector Strategy Group (SSG).

According to the MTBPM, the role of the MoF seems limited with most of the substance work happening in individual ministries and public institutions through Project Management Teams. The MoF launches the mid-term programme expenditure planning procedures and proposes the budgetary ceilings based on the available resources and of previous expenditure levels towards the Cabinet. These ceilings reduce the quantity of expected outputs or postpones their achievements without revising strategic documents. As is the case of the Handbook 2017-2022, the MTBPM does not provide institutions with methodological tools to estimate costs. The new Guidelines 2024-2029 provide a template for presenting cost estimates but could provide additional methodological guidance on how to estimate implementation costs.

In practice, the OECD’s fact-finding missions have shown that the MoF receives and verifies ministries and non-ministerial institutions’ financial requests throughout the year. Although this is not envisaged by the MTBPM, the MoF holds bilateral and collective budgetary discussions with ministries and public institutions. In the absence of the Palestinian Legislative Council, all the efforts to review the draft budgets of individual ministries and non-ministerial institutions fall on the MoF as well.

Comparing the Handbook on the Elaboration of Sectoral and Cross-Cutting Strategies and the Mid-Term Budgeting Procedures Manual

In general, the two guidelines are consistent and complementary with each other. However, they present some substantial differences which can generate confusion and lead to uncertainty. While the Handbook 2017-2022 recognises the inter-sectoral nature of whole-of-government strategies and provides for the establishment of inter-ministerial working groups, the MTBPM is only about programmes and reforms implemented by individual ministries/institutions. As such the MTBPM does not address programmes needing contributions of other public institutions, the private sector or civil society. Where the Handbook 2017-2022 provides room for negotiations with donors regarding the financial gaps, the MTBPM only provides the mandatory closure of all financial gaps. Addressing these issues would strengthen the usefulness of the guidance offered by both the MTBPM and the Handbook 2017-2022. It is unclear whether any changes were made to the MTBPM following the issuing of the new Guidelines 2024-2029.

References

[7] OECD (2022), Rule of Law and Governance in the Palestinian Authority: Delivering Better Policies and Legislation for People, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/68ffa992-en.

[4] OECD (2020), Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance: Baseline Features of Governments that Work Well, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c03e01b3-en.

[3] OECD (2018), “Toolkit for the preparation, implementation, monitoring, reporting and evaluation of public administration reform and sector strategies: GUIDANCE FOR SIGMA PARTNERS”.

[6] OECD (2014), “Recommendation of the Council on Digital Government Strategies”.

[5] Palestinian Authority (2022), “Government Reform Agenda”.

[2] Palestinian Authority (2020), “National Development Plan 2021-2023”, https://andp.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/2021-06/National%20Development%20Plan%202021-2023_English.pdf.

[1] Palestinian Authority (2016), “2017-2022 National Policy Agenda: Putting Citizens First”.

Notes

← 1.  In preparation of the NDP, in November 2020 the government performed a mid-term review of the NPA and sector and crosscutting strategies in co-ordination with all line ministries and other government bodies. To do that, the PMO developed and rolled out a guidance note on the update of sector and crosscutting strategies to all stakeholders. This guide set out several criteria to be observed in the process of updating strategies, including the need to build on a mid-term review of sector and crosscutting results, focus on the improvement pf public service delivery, considering the different crosscutting issues, and ensuring that the new strategies are realistic. However, both the mid-term review and the mentioned sector and crosscutting strategies were not available for review.

← 2.  1) Developing the system of legislation of the civil service sector and strengthening the oversight functions, 2) Develop human resources management policies and systems, 3) Invest in the development and qualification of the human capital of the civil service sector, 4) Develop integrated information systems to manage human resources of the civil service sector.

← 3.  Strategic objective 1: Expenditure of public finance based on what has been defined by sectoral strategies related to the programme's budget and gender-responsive budgets based on a medium-term spending plan; Strategic objective 2: Commitment to transparent, comprehensive accounting systems that are committed to good international standards and linked to an effective internal and external control and audit system; Strategic objective 3: Public revenues are collected efficiently, effectively, and fairly.

← 4.  World Bank, 2018 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) Assessment – FINAL Report (June 2918) for West Bank and Gaza, https://www.pefa.org/sites/pefa/files/2020-03/WBGS-Jun19-PFMPR-Public%20with%20PEFA%20Check_0.pdf.